In effect, the historic American nation is faced with a minority occupation government.Peter Brimelow wrote this at the end of his 2009 CPAC article. It certainly showed on Monday, with President Obama's nomination of Elena Kagan for the Supreme Court. This will bring the Jewish share of the bench to one third, and completely eliminate white Protestants —greatly to the delight of their rivals.
This is an extremely serious matter. The Supreme Court is effectively the senior legislating arm of the US Government. Shutting out from representation the community which founded the nation and still constitutes the largest single element in the population is ominous.
I predict that if Obama wins re election, a majority of the Supreme Court will be Jewish by the end of his term. After all, all three of Obama's recent nominations to be Federal Reserve Governors were Jews, bringing their representation on that body to 5 out of 7.
Kagan, of course, has been the beneficiary (very likely throughout her career) of Affirmative Action and ethnic log-rolling. (Obama's racism frustrated her boosters at the time of the Sotomayor nomination, but they are nothing if not persistent.) With only two year's law practice, no judicial experience, and a very thin portfolio of scholarship, her only objective qualifications are gender and creed. Affirmative Action will be as safe from her as from Sotomayor.
strongly suggests that Kagan would be quite willing to fashion her legal arguments to attain her liberal/left policy goals, and that is exactly what her other writings show. Her 1993 article "Regulation of Hate Speech and Pornography After R.A.V," (60 University of Chicago Law Review 873; available on Lexis/Nexis) indicates someone who is entirely on board with seeking ways to circumscribe free speech in the interests of multicultural virtue: “I take it as a given that we live in a society marred by racial and gender inequality, that certain forms of speech perpetuate and promote this inequality, and that the uncoerced disappearance of such speech would be cause for great elation.” She acknowledges that the Supreme Court is unlikely to alter its stance that speech based on viewpoint is protected by the First Amendment, but she sees that as subject to change with a different majority: The Supreme Court “will not in the foreseeable future” adopt the view that “all governmental efforts to regulate such speech … accord with the Constitution.” But in her view there is nothing to prevent it from doing so. Clearly, she does not see the protection of viewpoint-based speech as a principle worth preserving or set in stone. Rather, she believes that a new majority could rule that “all government efforts to regulate such speech” would be constitutional. All government efforts.Sadly, this has long been an objective of key Jewish organizations.
Both President Obama and Kagan on Monday went out of their way to dwell on the fact that Kagan's grandparents were immigrants. Evidently, having shallow roots in America is now a qualification to get to determine the country's laws. (This makes the questionable assumption that her native Upper West Side of Manhattan is actually America.) Open-Borders fanaticism from Justice Kagan is a virtual certainty.
The intellectual tradition of Eastern European Jews within their own community is a sorry tale of intolerance, bigotry and repression. English Common Law and the Westminster Parliamentary system did not originate in the shtetl. Elena Kagan is not fitted to protect America's Constitutional heritage.And very likely such is not her intention.
She must be opposed